How Does One Go About Being Subconciously Racist?

In Iowa, a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of 6,000 blacks passed over for government jobs alleges not active racism among those doing the hiring but rather subconcious racism.

…up to 6,000 African-Americans passed over for state jobs and promotions dating back to 2003 — do not say they faced overt racism or discriminatory hiring tests in Iowa, a state that is 91 percent white. Instead, their lawyers argue that managers subconsciously favored whites across state government, leaving blacks at a disadvantage in decisions over who got interviewed, hired and promoted.

So if there’s no evidence of active racism, if there is no indication that the people doing the hiring and promotions were making decisions based on skin color, then what are we left with?

The idea that simply not hiring or promoting a black person is in and of itself racist?

What I find more offensive than the idea that these 6,000 or so blacks weren’t hired/promoted is the idea that they then conclude that the mostly-white state is somehow racist.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • $8194357

    Sub consious racism is any one who hasn’t been converted whole heartedly over  to “social justice Black Liberation political correct secular humanisms” religion…In other words “all conservitives, Republicans”, and “anyone else” who won’t play the “false quilt shame game”….Go figure…

  • 2hotel9

     Ask Democrats, racism is what they are all about.

  • Flamejob5

    What’s actually racist is the class-action lawsuit itself.

    • headward

      I wonder if I can join the class being white, umm, Euporean American.

  • fedupny

     So instead of just thought police, we’ll now have subconscious thought police?

    • mickey_moussaoui

      dream police

      • $8194357

        I liked that album.

      • fedupny

         Sounds like a Cheap Trick.

  • Econwarrior

    Ideologues don’t need evidence.  Their ideology tells them who’s a racist.

  • borborygmi

    How can you prove something is subliminal.  Avg % or something like that would have to be argued.

  • Neiman

    In California if you list racial status in employment or education, that is racism and illegal. It is also true that if you do not include racial status in employment or education that too is racism and illegal. In other words, no matter what you do or do not do, what you think or do not think, it is all racism.

  • Bat One

    Nothing like blaming others for your own lack of accomplishment.

    • Matthew

       Do you really believe that institutional racism does not exist or do you think that minorities should just learn to live with it and not complain?

      • Bat One

        It’s been said, astutely, that the real purpose in creating institutions is the avoidance of personal responsibility.  Organizations don’t think.  Nor do they feel.  Only people do… including those seeking to avoid personal responsibility.

        So the short answer to your question is No!  Institutions, which neither think nor feel, are incapable of what you blithely label “racism.”  And while I realize that accusations of “racism” are the liberal Left’s all-time favorite defense tactic, it is also the most blatant example of self-serving, intellectual laziness. Kinda like your either-or proposition.

        • Matthew

           Institutions are made up of people.  Those people have emotions and biases, so yes, institutions do have emotions.

          I haven’t seen the statistics because the briefs aren’t online, but from
          the witnesses called in the case it is fair to assume that the African Americans are being promoted at a disproportionate amount.

          Other than the Army I don’t know what institutions you have been involved with.  Do you think that the black officers you served under were getting a fair shake?  That is assuming you ever came in contact with a black officer, which made up only 4% of officers at the time and most of them junior officers.

          I realize this is a tough legal argument because it is statistical and not based on any one blatant incident.  Our legal system is not truly designed to deal with this.  But you are in denial if you think that institutional racism doesn’t exist.  It is not intellectual laziness to review an argument.  It is intellectual laziness to deny that the argument even against, especially when their is evidence for it.

          • Bat One

            Let’s see if I understand your “argument.”  You acknowledge that people have “emotions and biases.”  And presumably you would acknowledge that people, not organizations, can think.  And I assume you’d agree that racism can be defined as a system of prejudicial thought and actions based on irrational emotion.  And yet despite that perfectly rational sequence, you insist that organizations have emotions and are, thus, racist.  Its not a very compelling, or rational, argument, and I am singularly unimpressed.  Really.

            But leaving aside your spurious and irrational definition, there are other problems with the case as presented, and it seems to me the most obvious is the plaintiffs’ reliance on wholesale arithmetic, and percentages, with no consideration for other, more pertinent factors.  The argument seems to be that because the plaintiffs are minority and have been deprived of what they believe they are entitled to, in a ratio disproportionate to the percent of the workforce they represent, that it must be “institutional racism” that’s responsible and they are thus entitled to compensation.  But there are certainly other factors involved in hiring and promotion decisions… in any organization.  To take your example, While the number of Black US Army officers may be only 4% of the total, despite the fact that Blacks are 12% of the US population, it may well be that only 4% or so of Blacks in the Army hold a college degree, a universal military prerequisite for a commission.

            There are other criteria for hiring and promotion, and some are obviously more subjective than others, but then if you acknowledge that there ARE other criteria, then an argument based almost exclusively on percentages pretty much dissipates, doesn’t it?

            You are correct that our legal system “is not truly designed to deal with this.”  And there is good reason for that.  Our legal system, civil and criminal, is based on the notion of actual, identifiable wrong, and personal responsibility, not some vaguely opaque notion of institutional culpability.

            As for me personally, no one who actually knows me has ever accused me of racism.  But then, I probably wouldn’t pay the accusation any attention in any case.

          • Matthew

             Not suprisingly you totally misunderstand the argument and you try to put words in my mouth, which you always complain about when others do it to you.

            I’ll admit, I do have faith in statistical analysis.  I think it reveals more truth than your anectdotal faith in the hiring process.  Studies have shown that people relate to other people who are more like them.  In the hiring practice that shows itself by the hiring committee hiring people more like themselves.  If they are all white this is what I call institutional bias and you call subconscious racism.  But either term is accurate because assuming only qualified applicants are being considered, people are not being promoted based on merit but on the biases of the hiring committee.  The problem with this is that only the exceptional minorities will be hired but the average majority will be promoted.  The system can’t be changed this way.

            You claim their is no identifiable wrong.  I disagree.  When you get a large enough sample size statistical anomalies are identifiable.  A promotion practice can be identified as being unfair and the only way to correct this is punish.

            I don’t claim you are overtly racist, but your support of quantitatively unfair practices is troubling.

          • Bat One

            Please detail where I have tried to put words in your mouth.  On the contrary, it is YOU who has put words in MY mouth, in particular your claim that I would label something as “subconscious racism.”  

            But leaving that bit of rhetorical dishonesty aside, you have stated your “faith” in statistical analysis.  And it surely must be a strong faith indeed, since you appear willing to ignore all other factors, lumping them together under the heading of “anecdotal.”  But if, as you’ve asserted, institutions or organizations can be racist because individuals within the organization are racist, please explain what percent of the individuals within a given organization must be shown to be racist for your “faith” in statistical analysis to label the organization itself racist?  If you are going to denigrate the subjective and anecdotal and rely instead on statistics and percentages, then surely there must be some sort of objective baseline or formulaic trigger that identifies when an institution or organization has crossed the line and no longer merely harbors persons who are racist (however THAT is statistically established!), but becomes racist itself.

            (I’ll overlook for the moment the FACT that all of this, being your own point of view and not legislatively or judicially defined, is itself subjective.)

          • Matthew

             Obviously you have never understood statics.   I am not ignoring any other evidence.  When you get a large enough sample size all the other evidence is taken into consideration.  They are called deviations and when you have a large enough sample you get a standard deviation.  I assume the reason they went back to 2003 was so they could get a large enough sample size where their statisticians said it was valid.

            If their promotion practice is outside the standard deviation that it becomes likely that it is not a fair promotion practice.

          • Bat One

            Obviously you have never understood statics [sic].

            Wrong inference, counselor.  I understand statistics quite well.  It’s your interpretation, and the legal application of that interpretation that’s at issue.

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            “I don’t believe for one minute that
            we are in, or about to enter into, a recession. 
            Despite the best efforts of the Democrats and the media to convince us
            otherwise…”

            Bat One on January 25, 2008 at 10:17 am

          • Matthew

             I didn’t say the argument would win. 

            But I think the argument has enough merit to at least consider.  I don’t think the biggest problem is whether the argument is right or wrong, but more of how do you remedy it and what are the actual damages.

            But I am least willing to consider the argument.

            And you say I am intellectually lazy.

            You probably know that their is bias in hiring, you just don’t care.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            I don’t think the problem is a lack of understanding of statistics.  I think the problem is your conclusion that a workforce that isn’t identical to the overall population in demographic makeup is due only to a racist hiring process.

            Which is a very, very stupid conclusion.

          • Matthew

             I didn’t say identical and I didn’t say overall population.

            Try to keep up.

          • VocalYokel

             A wise man (my Dad) taught me that there are three kinds of lies.

            Lies.
            Damned Lies.
            Statistics.

            As far as a “promotion practice” which occurs “outside the standards deviation”, is there any allowance made for the competence of applicants?

          • Matthew

             “As far as a “promotion practice” which occurs “outside the standards
            deviation”, is there any allowance made for the competence of
            applicants?”

            Yes, that is precisely where the standard deviation comes from. 

          • Matthew

             Was your father Mark Twain or did he just crib his material?

          • Bat One

            BTW, would you be good enough to define “racism.”

          • Matthew

             In this context I would say it is preference of one race over another that is not merit based.

          • Bat One

            So, the definition of racism changes with the “context” of the accusation?  I thought you said this case was based on statistics, not arguably subjective context.  Which is it?

          • Matthew

             The term the plaintiff’s used was not racism, but bias.

            And context always matters in lawsuits.

            I didn’t realize you lived in such a black and white world (pun intended).

          • Guest

             Would that be like voting for a president based solely on the president’s race?

          • 2hotel9

             Its a Democrat thang, you just don’t understand!

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            In this context, the definition seems to be “didn’t hire/promote some black people.”

      • mickey_moussaoui

        It also has alot to do with geography. Not every business is located in a region where there is a balanced mix of race.

        You sound like a race baiter

        • Matthew

          This article and this case have nothing to do with companies.

          Do you understand this?

          • mickey_moussaoui

            government or companies, same difference. Do you think affirmative action doesn’t impact them both?

          • Matthew

             No corporate hiring and civil service hiring in Iowa are different.

            If you want to start a thread about mythical companies creating jobs for minorities than do so, but those would be stupid companies.

  • Cherz1967

    You are all a bunch of racists for your racist remarks about racism.  Gees.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    I’ve seen first hand where affirmative action was used to invent positions just to keep the law suits at bay.

  • Matthew

    It is a statistical argument.  If the workforce is 91% white but 99% of promotions go to whites it is statistically improbable that these promotions are solely merit based.

    Do you even bother to read your source material?  Because it explains what the lawsuit is about.

    • mickey_moussaoui

      Matthew, I read it. The point is that some companies have had to invent a position within the ranks to satisfy the racial quotas. It has little to do with existing previous promotions. In most cases they also have to bend the merit curve down to satisfy the quota. Take for example the fire department that had to lower the test scores to make it easyer for blacks. One can argue that the companies didn’t look hard enough to fill this new “gifted” position and that would be a fair assumption. But the end result is often, not always, an individual getting a promotion who would not of met the merit otherwise. So in reality it is also statistically improbable that these NEW invented promotions are based on merit alone.

      • Matthew

         I don’t know what you read, but it isn’t the source material here.  This isn’t even about companies.  This also isn’t about not looking hard enough.  This is about when qualified candidates apply as a minority they are getting rejected at a rate that is outside a standard deviation that makes it a statistical improbability if this was happening randomly.

        If you have other source material, post it.

        • mickey_moussaoui

          STOP. Who said they were qualified? Where in this article did anyone prove that all the candidates were qualified? THAT is the big assumption here.

    • mickey_moussaoui

      Is it not racism when 98% of blacks vote for obama?

      • Matthew

         Are you prepared to make the argument that being black is historically a political positive in this country?

        There is no law against discrimination in voting, like their is in hiring.

        There are plenty of white people who didn’t vote for Obama because he was black.  It is probably a wash, but it isn’t actionable.

        • mickey_moussaoui

          They do have the advantage of using affirmative
          action in their favor. If Iowa is 91% white that leaves a small pool of blacks
          to select from. You seem to have the assumption that the small pool of blacks
          in Iowa is all equally qualified to each other as well as their white
          counterparts. Maybe they are not. This one little paragraph, as reported,
          doesn’t tell the whole story. The fact that it comes from their lawyers doesn’t
          add more credibility to the law suit either. The initial interview process for
          any job can be the biggest hurdle to getting any job. Maybe these blacks simply
          didn’t present themselves well enough right from the start.

          Even an over qualified candidate can screw up a job interview.

          • Matthew

             You really don’t understand statistics. 

            If you have a large enough pool, and they went back to 2003 to get a large enough pool, than everything else will even out.  Just as many white people will screw up interviews as black people.

    • Econwarrior

      Your “statistical argument” lacks the statistic of what percentage of “blacks” are promotable, and so is nonsense.  It is racism to divide people on the basis of their perceived skin color, anyway.

      • Matthew

         If you have a large enough sample of qualified candidates and only whites get promoted than you are already dividing people based on skin color.  It is just the skin color that you prefer.

        The only reason that my “statistical argument” lacks the actual statics is because the briefs of this case aren’t online.

        But your belief that institutional racism doesn’t exist in America is deluded.

        • Bat One

          “Qualified candidates” you say?  And how is that criteria quantified?

          • Matthew

            When somebody writes a job description they list qualifications.  Usually they have do to with education and experience.  Those are qualified candidates.

            Will there be some idiots in that pool?  Yes, but that is why when you use statistical analysis you require a large pool.

            Do you really not understand statistics?

          • Adam

            Let us say that everyone who applied has the exact same qualifications and that there is a subconscious bias against blacks. How does the person responsible decide between the equally qualified white people left? Maybe they didn’t like someone’s voice; or thought they had an annoying laugh; or they told a bad joke; or the interviewer is really short and doesn’t like tall people; or the interviewee was a kiss ass; or maybe they just didn’t like the vibe they got off them; maybe they reminded them of someone they dislike; maybe they just didn’t like their face. Why can’t any of these subconscious biases also be used against black people? Why does it have to be because they are black?

            There are many different factors in making a hiring/promotion decision. How do you stop someone from having a bias they have no control over and don’t realize they have? By forcing them to hire black people (or tall people, or fat people, or short people, or ugly people)? So now you’ve gone from a black person maybe not being hired because they are black and someone may have had an unconscious bias against them to a white person not being hired because they are white due to a conscious and willful decision by a company/government that they need to hire a certain amount of minorities to not appear racist. How is that better?

            I would rather know that I got a job because I was qualified and was able to impress someone with my ability to do the job than to know that I got a job because the employer had to meet a quota.

          • Matthew

             “I would rather know that I got a job because I was qualified and was
            able to impress someone with my ability to do the job than to know that I
            got a job because the employer had to meet a quota.”

            But it is OK if you got the job because a racial bias of the hiring committee, not because you were more qualified.

          • Adam

            If I knew that someone better than me didn’t get the job for the sole reason that they were black I would not be OK, nor would I want to work for a company that allowed that. However, we are talking about alleged subconscious bias. As I said before, there is no way to know all the little factors that go into making a hiring decision. The person who looks best on paper, after going through the interview process, doesn’t always get the job.

          • Matthew

             Problem is you would never know.  It is impossible to show bias in any one hiring.  That is why they are using statistics to show that the overall system is flawed.

          • Adam

            You keep talking about the statistics and why they are using such a large pool of cases but never stop to consider the size of that pool vs. the state government. There are 6,000 alleged cases of bias since 2003. That is about 667 a year. The State of Iowa employs 232,000 people. 667 hiring/promotion decisions a year affects about %0.3 of the jobs. That doesn’t seem very statistically significant.

          • 2hotel9

             The only flaw is you can’t provide any proof of racism other than that coming form the Democrat Party and all of you on the political left. Plain as plain, your Party and political ideology is the source of racism in American politics and business. Period. Full stop.

            Dr Martin Luther King Jr, the Republican Civil Rights crusader fought for an America where race was irrelevant. The Democrat Party and all other leftist political ideologues destroyed his dream. Good job, Matthew, good job.

          • Bat One

            “I would rather know that I got a job because I was qualified and was able to impress someone with my ability to do the job than to know that I got a job because the employer had to meet a quota.

            Depends on what it is you really wanted – a job, or a paycheck!

          • Bat One

            Do you mean to suggest that the percentage of “idiots” in each and every pool of applicants will be the same? Because if not, how do your statistics adjust for the differing percent of “idiots” from one such pool to the next?

            Now, let us suppose, just for the sake of argument, that some of those “idiots” are minority.  Does the percentage of minorities among the “idiots” vary from one group to another?  How is that variance accounted for?  Do minorities have a higher percent of “idiots” than the total labor force?  How about the overall state population?  Are the minority “idiots” retained as plaintiffs?  After all, it hardly seems right to claim victim status and compensation for someone who is an “idiot” in the first place and should thus be considered to have been rightly passed over to begin with, correct?  And who gets to inform the minority “idiots” that they can not be part of the plaintiffs group, and share in any compensation awarded, because they are “idiots”?

            Finally, what is the statistical baseline being used?  To claim that a group of people have been systematically deprived and unfairly subjected to bias, based on statistics, should there not be some baseline or statistical norm against which the claim is based?  So what is it?  The percent of minorities, “idiots” and all, among the national population?  Among the population of the state of Iowa?  Or perhaps among the total number of state employees?  And why is one such baseline more appropriate than another… other than the advantage it affords the plaintiffs and, of course, the plaintiff’s lawyers?

            Are you sure YOU understand statistics… and the complexities of using them to prove your point?

          • Matthew

             Your whole argument is why you need a large pool of candidates.  It is why they went as far back as 2003.

            I am sure I understand statistics.  I am also sure you don’t.

          • Bat One

            If your understanding of statistics is so superior, why is it that you are unable to answer any of the questions I’ve raised?  Hmmm?

            Disparaging my knowledge without demonstrating your self-purported superiority by answering my questions proves nothing more than the shallowness of your argument or your own cowardice.

          • Matthew

             I can’t answer your questions because I don’t know what was done in Iowa.  They hired a professor at the University of Washington to do the analysis.  It is not been published yet.  But your throwing out buzz words doesn’t show anything.

          • Bat One

            The only thing I am trying to show is that statistical analysis as the basis for a claim of employment bias, and your endorsement thereof, are, charitably,  of very dubious value, without one helluva a lot more information, which you apparently are unable to provide.

            You’ve provided no facts beyond your own enthusiasm, and you have answered none of the questions I’ve asked… questions which are each basic to anyone who does know something about statistics and is defending against the claimed bias.

            Still, I look forward to your explanations and the answers to those questions.  My own opinion is that the “statistical analysis” you are so enamored of is really little more than a convoluted means of getting around the necessity of actually proving intent, which would be key if the plaintiffs, and of course their attorney, ever hoped to collect any repar…um… compensation.

          • Matthew

             I can’t answer your questions because the study has not been released.  It is impossible to answer specific questions about a study without reading the study,.

            I am not endorsing their claim.  I just believe that bias is possible and that their argument should be reviewed. 

            You are the one denying that there ever could be merit to the argument and are dismissing the case before looking at the evidence.

            I believe your quote was that they are
            “blaming others for your own lack of accomplishment.”  I think they are just looking for their state to treat them fairly.

          • Bat One

            Get back to me when you have facts!

          • 2hotel9

            That will never happen, Bravo1. Charges of racism are all Democrats have, no proof, just screeching effeminately and stomping their little feet. Next they will move to holding their breath.  No facts, no proof. 

          • Bat One

            Of course!

        • Econwarrior

          So, you try to change the subject from “subliminal” racism(an exclusively subjective judgment) to “institutional” racism, which is a political judgment?
          You first asserted that it “proved” racism when there was an 8% difference: “It is a statistical argument.  If the workforce is 91% white but 99% of
          promotions go to whites it is statistically improbable that these
          promotions are solely merit based”, but now you assert that “only whites(sic) get promoted…”, so which is it?
          Your constant need to dance from one position to another is an indicator that you are not making a “statistical” argument; you are making an ideological argument based on your extreme left wing anti-American beliefs.
          As a typical ideologue, your conclusions are foregone, and you just have to shape the discussion to support your position, regardless of the facts at hand.

        • Econwarrior

          “But your belief that institutional racism doesn’t exist in America is deluded.”

          There is no evidence to support your belief in “institutional” racism, other than your skewed “statistics” based upon an artificial division of Americans into skin color groups, without taking any other qualities into account.
          Your method of classification is self-fulfilling.  For someone who claims to be knowledgeable about statistics to not know that is unforgiveable.

        • mickey_moussaoui

          “if”

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      So a given workforce has to reflect the racial makeup of the population at large, otherwise the hiring decisions are racist?

      What if more whites or Asians or Indians applied for the jobs than blacks?  What if the pool of applicants itself wasn’t proportional, racially, to the overall population?

      What if more whites or Asians or whatever were just better qualified than the blacks?

      I read the “source material,”  What I’m worried about is if you even understood it.

      • Matthew

         If you are going to do an analysis of promotion or hiring practice the pool is not the population at large, but the pool of qualified candidates. 

        “What if more whites or Asians or whatever were just better qualified than the blacks?”

        That is why you need a large pool.  If you have a large enough pool than the promotions or hiring should reflect the pool within a standard deviation.  If not than the process is probably biased.

        The state of Iowa back to 2003 is a large pool and if they are grossly outside the standard deviation than their is a problem.

        BTW, I use the word probably because there is no certainty in this.  But the legal standard is not beyond a reasonable doubt, but instead a preponderance of the evidence.  The plaintiff’s only have to show that it is more likely than not a biased system.

        You clearly didn’t understand the source material.

        • mickey_moussaoui

          If 91% of Iowa is white then it makes it tough to say there is a “large pool” of blacks to choose from and all your barking is just noise.

          • Matthew

             Apparently there have been more than 6000 hiring decisions since 2003 involving qualified black candidates.  I think that is a pretty large pool.  In fact, I think they went back to 2003 precisely that their statisticians told them that they had to go back that far for an adequate analysis.

          • Bat One

            And during the same time period, how many hiring decisions were there involving qualified white candidates?  Also, please explain who determines that all those hiring decisions you’ve cited involved qualified candidates?  Was that the judgement of the person(s) tasked with the hiring decision, or is that the mere opinion of some statistician hired by the plaintiffs’ attorney?

          • Matthew

             Obviously you think it is impossible to do a valid statistical analysis of hiring practices.  I think you can.

            I can’t answer any specific questions about the analysis done in Iowa because it is not available.  If it becomes available I will read it and explain it to you.

            You are being willfully ignorant to protect the status quo.

          • 2hotel9

             “You are being willfully ignorant to protect the status quo”

            Yes, you racist Democrats embrace your willful ignorance and use obfuscation and double speak to advance your racist agenda. We. Get. It.

          • Bat One

            No!  And once again you are imputing to me things I have neither said nor suggested – dishonestly.

            It isn’t that I “think it is impossible to do a valid statistical analysis of hiring practices” at all.  Rather, its that I think that statistical analysis as you’ve described it (sort of!) here is a pitiful excuse for proving bias in hiring in a court of law and awarding compensation to plaintiffs who have provided nothing approaching a “preponderance” of evidence that they were the victims of race-based bias. The questions I have asked, which you have barely acknowledged, much less answered, could be expected of any modestly capable second year law student… and you know it!  And if you can”t answer even those few most basic questions, then you have no reason for you vigorous defense of the plaintiffs’ cause, except your own, personal bias.

          • Adam

            I don’t know how many other hiring decisions there were but the state of Iowa employs 232,000 people. Going back to 2003 those 6,000 decisions affected less than %0.3 of state jobs every year. I don’t see how that can be statistically significant.

  • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

    Where are my “reparations?” 

    • $8194357

      In the bathroom where you left em?  joke…Preperation…H ..I laughed….

  • Econwarrior

    So-called “subliminal racism” is just a reflection of anti-Americanism among liberals; it saves them the trouble of using facts and logic to justify their ideology. Politically, it serves the same purpose as so-called “global warming”.

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    Two-bit pop depth psychology has descended into the masses.

    • mickey_moussaoui

      feeeeeeeelings, nothing more than feelings.
      Feelings, wo-o-o-o feelings.

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        There is a marvelous book by Theodore Dalrymple with the title Spoilt Rotten: The Toxic Cult of Sentimentality which pretty much lays out why we are in the current situation.  One very interesting feature of the work is that he links sentimentality to brutality and coercion.

  • LastBestHope

    There must be an election coming up. Dems are using the Race Card early and often. Here’s some irony on how the GOP is a “white southern old man party”…no really, Democrats are saying this:

    http://www.breitbart.tv/msnbc-panel-agrees-gop-is-white-southern-old-man-party/

  • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

    If anyone has bothered to look at the examples of citizens that are put up on this web site to be derided, you would know how subconscious racism works.  SAB always puts black citizens in pictures and images to deride your everyday citizen.  Poofy, Rob and Donny Baseball are famous for having example after example where black people are the object or image of their scorn when it comes to a particular issue.

    • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

      Your mindless race baiting is duly noted, Racebaitertized. I have put up pictures of some half-Hispanic, half Italian dweeb, not because of his race, but because of his mindless narcissism and propensity to lie through his fecal stained teeth. You too, have posted his pictures dozens of times. Does that make you racist, too?  (Trick question!)

      “when i used the word darkies,  i  mean people with dark skin” -Hannitized

      BTW, you are “famous” for your drive by libels. Do you have any links to putting “black citizens in pictures and images to deride your everyday citizen” as you have loosely claimed? I looked back through quite a few of my posts and can’t find any where I’ve used a photo of anyone to deride “your everyday citizen”.

      Aren’t you really just lying through your fecal stained teeth again, because you have no argument, no facts and no game? Toddle off little Kahuna. Join your peers at the kiddie pool. (Or is that “pee-ers”?)

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        Why try to distract from the fact that you and the others post pictures of black citizens in an attempt bring anger to a policy or to ridicule them?  Let’s face it, when conservatives want to hate something they try to tie it to black people and this supposed idea that blacks are looking for handouts, which is why you are trying to make issue of me mocking Rob, for his post that claims environmental justice is nothing more than blacks wanting free money.

        Post the link.

        • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

          “Why try to distract from the fact that you and the others post pictures
          of black citizens in an attempt bring anger to a policy or to ridicule
          them?” Because you are once again lying through your fecal stained teeth. If I have done any such thing, then you should  “Post the links”.
          They should not be hard to find, as one mindless, lying POS said that SAB “always” does this and that there are “example after example” of it.  Put up or shut up, POSititzed. The onus is on you, Tiny Fruitcake, when you bring an accusation, to provide the evidence. You obviously can’t, because there is none.

          What an infantile fool you are, Tiny Fruitcake!  Go back to the kiddie pool, and play with yourself there, little Kahuna.

    • Bat One

      REALLY???  So you’re saying that deriding someone who is black is racism?  That’s nonsense, and even you aren’t so stupid as to think otherwise.

      Perhaps you too ought to give us a concise definition of racism, because denigrating someone who is Black for something that person says or does isn’t racism.

      On the other hand, to most people, calling a Black Secretary of State a “house nigga” most certainly is racist, although I don’t recall you were particularly offended by Ted Rall’s cartoon.

    • mickey_moussaoui

      That’s our Debbie, Haniitized Wasserman Schultz

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

    BTW, Clueless Noob: I went back a month and a half, and the only post I could find that might have elicited anger or ridicule was a video I posted on the #Occupy slobs who had trashed a house in Seattle. (Today, a similar story surfaced in NY). Oh, and there were no pictures of black people. Mind Read Fail, Wankerdoodle.

    http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/when-occupy-means-i-steal-whats-yours/

  • 2hotel9

    See? I told you all you had to do was ask Democrats about their racism and they would merrily tell all about it.

Top